At first glance, the legislation seems like the sort that no one could possibly have an objection to.

The problem is huge. Only 58 percent of child support payments are collected in Indiana. The unpaid child support bill is
upwards of $2 billion, which includes 165,000 non-custodial parents who owe $2,000 or more.

That's pathetic.

Senate Bill 163 could help make a dent in that deficit by snagging the gaming winnings of deadbeat parents in Indiana's
casinos. Indiana Lawyer wrote a story on this topic in the Jan. 20-Feb. 2, 2010, issue. The legislation was before
the House Committee on Public Policy for a vote at Indiana Lawyer deadline.

The bill would bring state law in line with federal law regarding income withholding and participating in family assistance
programs. SB 163 also would allow various state agencies or boards to suspend licenses - such as drivers, fishing, hunting,
or alcoholic beverage licenses - if child support payments aren't made. This legislation also addresses medical costs
in relation to how child support is calculated, which is an ever-growing item of interest that gets at how both parents must
pay for a child's health insurance.

But the part of the bill that would require casinos to check their winning patron's names against a state database of
parents who owe child support has the gaming industry lobbying against the measure.

Here's how it would work. Let's say Deadbeat Mom owes Custodial Dad $4,500 in unpaid child support for the benefit
of their two children. She takes some of the proceeds from her first paycheck in ages to one of our state's riverboat
casinos for a night of high rolling and she hits it big, to the tune of $2,000. While she's whooping and hollering about
her payday, the casino will do a check of her name against the state's database of deadbeat parents, and finding Deadbeat
Mom's name there, will redirect the winnings to her two children.

It's a great scenario from the point of of view of Department of Child Services Director James Payne, a former juvenile
court judge. He said during a hearing on the legislation last month that banks are currently required to perform similar checks
for deadbeat parents, and that insurance companies do so now on a voluntary basis when handling insurance award payouts.

But the Casino Association of Indiana believes it's being picked on with the proposal, arguing that the database checks
could cause a two-minute delay on casino floors with every win. That could add up to 13,000 work-hours every year. CAI Director
Mike Smith believes the checks would cause grumbling on the casino floors and cause gamblers who might be snagged by the database
to go outside Indiana for their fun.

"With our tax burdens, we are paying our fair share to have the privilege of operating in Indiana," Smith told
the committee last month. "We just ask not to be additionally burdened."

He's right about the tax portion of his argument. Indiana is second only to Nevada in the amount of tax revenue it earns
from gaming, taking in $838.2 million in 2008. The figures for 2009 aren't currently available.

Casinos already are required to generate tax forms for people who win more than $1,200 on slot machines and more than $600
from certain types of other gambling. Smith thinks it makes more sense to send that information not only to the Indiana Department
of Revenue but also the DCS for review for child support collections.

The only problem with that idea is the money will surely already have been spent by the time the state could learn it's
available to collect.

Most lawmakers like the bill, while one voted against it because he thought it didn't go far enough and should involve
other industries.

We believe this is one of those ideas that's just too good to pass up. A state that puts up with collecting only 58 percent
of its court-ordered child support payments ought to do all it can to do better by its children.*

Conversations

0 Comments

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or
hateful.

You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.

Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content
are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.

No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are
relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.

We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag
a post simply because you disagree with it.